Politics for Pros- moderated Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Lane3 who wrote (89721)	12/8/2004 10:16:54 AM
From: aladin	Read Replies (2) of 793912

Karen, In one of the religious debates a few months ago you did express a problem with the Amish on the issue of contribution. Me - I take the tact that there is separation of church and state and also that sticks and stones can break bones, but names will never hurt me. This along with the 'golden rule' leads me to a philosophy that says evangelicals and muslims can do what they like, but when its spills over into violence sanctuary and separation laws evaporate and a person, congregation or even entire sect can lose its status. So the fact that a Wahabi or Protestant (fill in denomination here) feels or says that I am going to hell is fine as long as he or she is not engaged in helping matters. Everything before that is free speech. Now after your clarification post on violence I concede your point on fundamentalism vs jihadi, but it is often confused. For example the discussions of violent christians paints all fundamentalist christians as prone to violence. Perhaps we need a term for those few dozen violent christians similar to those few million muslims we call jihadis. Then your discussion on similarities between non-violent fundamentalists of both persuasions would make sense. John

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next